SETERUS, INC. - Florida Company Profile

Company Details

Entity Name:	SETERUS, INC.
Jurisdiction:	FLORIDA
Filing Type:	Foreign Profit
Status:	Inactive The business entity is inactive. This status may signal operational issues or voluntary closure, raising concerns about the business's ability to repay loans and requiring careful risk assessment by lenders.
Date Filed:	28 Mar 2011 (14 years ago)
Date of dissolution:	01 Mar 2019 (6 years ago)
Last Event:	WITHDRAWAL
Event Date Filed:	01 Mar 2019 (6 years ago)
Document Number:	F11000001423
FEI/EIN Number	274605449 Federal Employer Identification (FEI) Number assigned by the IRS.
Address:	3039 CORNWALLIS ROAD, BUILDING 203, SUITE AA145, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC, 27709, US
Mail Address:	3039 CORNWALLIS ROAD, BUILDING 203, SUITE AA145, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC, 27709, US
Place of Formation:	DELAWARE

Key Officers & Management

Name	Role	Address
PEELER LESLIE A	President	14523 SW MILLIKAN WAY, BEAVERTON, OR, 97005
ANDERSON DARREN R	SENI	3039 CORNWALLIS ROAD, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC, 27709
LOFE DONALD P	Seni	14523 Millikan Way, Beaverton, OR, 97005

Events

Event Type	Filed Date	Value	Description
WITHDRAWAL	2019-03-01	-	-
REGISTERED AGENT CHANGED	2019-03-01	REGISTERED AGENT REVOKED	-
CHANGE OF PRINCIPAL ADDRESS	2015-03-23	3039 CORNWALLIS ROAD, BUILDING 203, SUITE AA145, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27709	-
CHANGE OF MAILING ADDRESS	2015-03-23	3039 CORNWALLIS ROAD, BUILDING 203, SUITE AA145, RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27709	-
NAME CHANGE AMENDMENT	2014-02-24	SETERUS, INC.	-
AMENDMENT	2011-09-28	-	AFFIDAVIT CHANGING OFF/DIRECTORS

Court Cases

Title

Case Number

Docket Date

Status

SETERUS, INC. VS RACHELE CIBULA, et al.

4D2019-1197

2019-04-26

Closed

Classification	NOA Non Final - Circuit Civil - Other
Court	4th District Court of Appeal
Originating Court	Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County 2015CA010910

Parties

Name	SETERUS, INC.
Role	Appellant
Status	Active
Representations	Christopher Patrick Hahn

Name	NESTOR MATO
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	RACHELE CIBULA
Role	Appellee
Status	Active
Representations	James L. Kauffman, J. Dennis Card, Jr., Darren R. Newhart

Name	BELKIS VELASQUEZ
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	JAMES MONTESI
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	Hon. Gerard Joseph Curley
Role	Judge/Judicial Officer
Status	Active

Name	Clerk - Palm Beach
Role	Lower Tribunal Clerk
Status	Active

Docket Entries

Docket Date	2020-04-29
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion For Attorney's Fees
Description	Deny Attorney's Fees ~ ORDERED that appellees' August 20, 2019 motion for attorney's fees is denied as moot.

Docket Date	2020-04-28
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Status Report
Description	Status Report
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2020-04-28
Type	Disposition by Order
Subtype	Dismissed
Description	ORD-Grant Voluntary Dismissal (Joint) ~ ORDERED that, having reviewed the April 28, 2020 joint status report, at the request of the parties, this case is dismissed.

Docket Date	2020-04-28
Type	Disposition
Subtype	Dismissed
Description	Dismissed - Order by Clerk

Docket Date	2020-04-20
Type	Order
Subtype	Order to File Status Report
Description	Order to File Status Report ~ ORDERED that, having reviewed the April 17, 2020 joint status report, the parties shall file another report on the status of the settlement on or before May 5, 2020.

Docket Date	2020-04-17
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Status Report
Description	Status Report
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2020-04-17
Type	Order
Subtype	Order to File Status Report
Description	Order to File Status Report ~ ORDERED that the parties shall file a status report, within five (5) days from the date of this order, apprising the court of the status of the proposed class settlement.

Docket Date	2020-01-14
Type	Order
Subtype	Order
Description	Miscellaneous Order ~ ORDERED that, having reviewed the January 10, 2020 joint status report, the parties shall file a status report apprising the court of the outcome of the final settlement approval hearing on or before April 10, 2020.

Docket Date	2020-01-10
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Status Report
Description	Status Report
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-12-17
Type	Order
Subtype	Order to File Status Report
Description	Order to File Status Report ~ ORDERED that, having reviewed the December 16, 2019 joint status report, the parties shall file another report on the status of the settlement within thirty (30) days from the date of this order.

Docket Date	2019-12-16
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Status Report
Description	Status Report
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-11-08
Type	Order
Subtype	Order
Description	Miscellaneous Order ~ ORDERED that, having considered the parties’ joint notice of settlement, this case is stayed pending the trial court’s approval of the proposed class settlement. The parties, within thirty (30) days from the date of this order, shall file a report on the status of the settlement.

Docket Date	2019-11-07
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice
Description	Notice ~ OF SETTLEMENT
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-09-06
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response
Description	Grant EOT to file Response ~ ORDERED that Appellant's Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Appellee's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs is granted. The response filed September 5, 2019 is accepted as timely.

Docket Date	2019-09-05
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time to File Response
Description	Motion for Extension of Time to File Response ~ TO MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-09-05
Type	Response
Subtype	Response
Description	Response ~ TO MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-08-20
Type	Motions Relating to Attorney Fees/Costs
Subtype	Motion For Attorney's Fees
Description	Motion For Attorney's Fees
On Behalf Of	RACHELE CIBULA

Docket Date	2019-08-20
Type	Brief
Subtype	Reply Brief
Description	Appellant's Reply Brief
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-08-19
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Reply Brief
Description	Order Granting EOT for Appellant's Reply Brief ~ ORDERED that appellant's August 16, 2019 motion for extension of time is granted, and appellant shall serve the reply brief within one (1) day from the date of this order. In addition, if the reply brief is served after the time provided for in this order, it may be stricken.

Docket Date	2019-08-16
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Reply Brief
Description	Mot. for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-07-23
Type	Record
Subtype	Appendix to Response
Description	Appendix to Response ~ TO ANSWER BRIEF
On Behalf Of	RACHELE CIBULA

Docket Date	2019-07-23
Type	Order
Subtype	Order Striking Filing
Description	Order Striking Appendix - Non-Compliance With R. 9.220 ~ ORDERED that the appellee's appendix to the amended answer brief is stricken as not in compliance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.220(c), which was amended effective October 1, 2017, in that it was not bookmarked in compliance with Rule 9.220(c)(3). An amended appendix in compliance with Rule 9.220(c) shall be filed within two (2) days from the date of this order.

Docket Date	2019-07-19
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Affidavit
Description	Affidavit ~ OF JAMES L. KAUFFMAN
On Behalf Of	RACHELE CIBULA

Docket Date	2019-07-19
Type	Brief
Subtype	Amended Answer Brief
Description	Amended Appellee's Answer Brief
On Behalf Of	RACHELE CIBULA

Docket Date	2019-07-19
Type	Record
Subtype	Appendix
Description	Appendix to Brief ~ *STRICKEN 7/23/19*
On Behalf Of	RACHELE CIBULA

Docket Date	2019-07-18
Type	Order
Subtype	Order Vacating/Withdrawing Order
Description	ORD-Amended Order ~ ORDERED that this court's July 18, 2019 order is amended as follows: ORDERED that the appellee’s appendix to the answer brief is stricken as not incompliance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.220(c), which was amended effectiveOctober 1, 2017, in that it was not properly indexed and consecutively paginated, beginningwith the cover sheet as page 1, was not text searchable, was not paginated so that the pagenumbers displayed by the PDF reader exactly match the pagination of the index, and was notbookmarked in compliance with Rule 9.220(c)(3). An amended appendix in compliance withRule 9.220(c) shall be filed within two (2) days from the date of this order.

Docket Date	2019-07-17
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice of Confidential Information within Court Filing
Description	Notice of Confidential Information Within Court Filing
On Behalf Of	RACHELE CIBULA

Docket Date	2019-07-17
Type	Record
Subtype	Appendix
Description	Appendix to Brief ~ *STRICKEN 7/18/19*
On Behalf Of	RACHELE CIBULA

Docket Date	2019-07-17
Type	Brief
Subtype	Answer Brief
Description	Appellee's Answer Brief
On Behalf Of	RACHELE CIBULA

Docket Date	2019-06-27
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Answer Brief
Description	Order Granting EOT for Answer Brief ~ ORDERED that appellees' June 26, 2019 motion for extension of time is granted, and appellees shall serve the answer brief on or before July 17, 2019. In addition, appellees are notified that the failure to serve the brief within the time provided herein may foreclose appellees' right to file a brief or otherwise participate in this appeal.

Docket Date	2019-06-26
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Answer Brief
Description	Mot. for Extension of time to file Answer Brief
On Behalf Of	RACHELE CIBULA

Docket Date	2019-06-06
Type	Brief
Subtype	Amended Initial Brief
Description	Amended Appellant's Initial Brief ~ Amended only to update Citations to Amended Appendix
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-06-06
Type	Record
Subtype	Appendix
Description	Appendix to Brief
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-06-04
Type	Order
Subtype	Order Striking Filing
Description	Order Striking Appendix - Non-Compliance With R. 9.220 ~ ORDERED that the appellant's appendix to the initial brief is stricken as not in compliance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.220(c), which was amended effective October 1, 2017, in that it was not properly indexed and consecutively paginated, beginning with the cover sheet as page 1, was not paginated so that the page numbers displayed by the PDF reader exactly match the pagination of the index, and was not bookmarked in compliance with Rule 9.220(c)(3). An amended appendix in compliance with Rule 9.220(c) shall be filed within two (2) days from the date of this order.

Docket Date	2019-06-03
Type	Brief
Subtype	Initial Brief
Description	Initial Brief on Merits
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-06-03
Type	Record
Subtype	Appendix
Description	Appendix to Brief ~ *STRICKEN 6/4/19*
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-05-29
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Initial Brief
Description	Order Granting EOT for Initial Brief ~ ORDERED that appellant's May 28, 2019 motion for extension of time is granted, and appellant shall serve the initial brief within five (5) days from the date of this order. In addition, if the initial brief is not served within the time provided for in this order, the above-styled case may be subject to dismissal or the court in its discretion may impose other sanctions.

Docket Date	2019-05-28
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Initial Brief
Description	Mot. for Extension of time to file Initial Brief
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-05-14
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Initial Brief
Description	Order Granting EOT for Initial Brief ~ ORDERED that appellant's May 10, 2019 motion for extension of time is granted, and appellant shall serve the initial brief on or before May 28, 2019. In addition, if the initial brief is not served within the time provided for in this order, the above-styled case may be subject to dismissal or the court in its discretion may impose other sanctions.

Docket Date	2019-05-10
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Initial Brief
Description	Mot. for Extension of time to file Initial Brief
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-05-07
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Case Filing Fee Paid through Portal
Description	Case Filing Fee Paid Through Portal
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

Docket Date	2019-04-29
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Filing Fee
Description	ORD-Pay Filing Fee-Civil Appeal ~ The jurisdiction of this court was invoked by filing of a Notice of Appeal in the lower tribunal. The $300.00 filing fee, or a circuit court clerk's determination of indigent status, did not accompany the Notice of Appeal as required in Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.110(b) and 9.140(a). The filing fee is due and payable at the time of filing REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE APPEAL IS LATER DISMISSED VOLUNTARILY OR ADVERSELY.ORDERED that appellant shall pay the $300.00 filing fee or file the circuit court clerk's determination of indigent status in this court within ten (10) days from the date of this order. The fee may be paid electronically through the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal – see the court’s website for details. Failure to comply within the time prescribed will result in dismissal of this cause and may result in the court sanctioning of any party, or the party's attorney, who has not paid the filing fee. The attorney filing the Notice of Appeal has a duty to tender the filing fee to the appellate court when the appeal is initiated. See In Re Payment of Filing Fees, 744 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Failure of the attorney to pay will result in referral to the Department of Financial Services for collection.**NOTE: This order does not toll the time for filing any pleadings necessary to prosecute this appeal and no extensions of time will be entertained. Once the fee is paid, it is not refundable. Except for dismissal, this court will take no action in this appeal until the filing fee is paid or until a circuit court clerk's determination of indigent status is filed.

Docket Date	2019-04-29
Type	Letter
Subtype	Acknowledgment Letter
Description	Acknowledgment Letter

Docket Date	2019-04-26
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Fee Status
Description	FP:Fee Paid Through Portal

Docket Date	2019-04-26
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice of Appeal
Description	Notice of Appeal Filed
On Behalf Of	SETERUS, INC.

GLENN Q. ROSE AND TINA M. ROSE VS QUICKEN LOANS, INC., MML 5357, SETERUS, INC., ET AL.

5D2019-0112

2019-01-14

Closed

Classification	NOA Final - Circuit Civil - Foreclosure
Court	5th District Court of Appeal
Originating Court	Circuit Court for the Seventh Judicial Circuit, Volusia County 2017-11332-CIDL

Parties

Name	GLENN Q. ROSE
Role	Appellant
Status	Active
Representations	Rafael F. Garcia

Name	TINA M. ROSE
Role	Appellant
Status	Active

Name	MERS, LLC
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	FANNIE MAE CORP.
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	MML 5357
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	QUICKEN LOANS INC.
Role	Appellee
Status	Active
Representations	William L. Grimsley

Name	SETERUS, INC.
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	Hon. Randell H. Rowe, III
Role	Judge/Judicial Officer
Status	Active

Name	Volusia Cty Circuit Crt Clerk
Role	Lower Tribunal Clerk
Status	Active

Docket Entries

Docket Date	2019-11-12
Type	Mandate
Subtype	Mandate
Description	Mandate

Docket Date	2019-11-12
Type	Record
Subtype	Returned Records
Description	Returned Records ~ NO RECORD-EFILED

Docket Date	2019-10-22
Type	Disposition by Opinion
Subtype	Affirmed
Description	Affirmed - Per Curiam Affirmed ~ PCA

Docket Date	2019-07-08
Type	Brief
Subtype	Answer Brief
Description	Appellee's Answer Brief
On Behalf Of	Quicken Loans, Inc.

Docket Date	2019-07-02
Type	Order
Subtype	Order Discharging Show Cause Order
Description	ORD-Discharging Show Cause

Docket Date	2019-07-01
Type	Record
Subtype	Supplemental Record
Description	Supplemental Records ~ 21 PAGES
On Behalf Of	Volusia Cty Circuit Crt Clerk

Docket Date	2019-06-24
Type	Order
Subtype	Show Cause for Brief or Record on Appeal
Description	ORD-Show Cause Supplemental Record ~ AA W/IN 10 DAYS; DISCHARGED PER 7/2 ORDER

Docket Date	2019-06-07
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion to Supplement Record
Description	Order Granting Motion to Supplement the Record ~ SROA BY 6/21

Docket Date	2019-05-28
Type	Brief
Subtype	Initial Brief
Description	Initial Brief on Merits
On Behalf Of	GLENN Q. ROSE

Docket Date	2019-05-24
Type	Motions Relating to Records
Subtype	Motion to Supplement Record
Description	Motion To File Supplemental Record
On Behalf Of	GLENN Q. ROSE

Docket Date	2019-05-20
Type	Record
Subtype	Record on Appeal
Description	Received Records ~ 493 PAGES
On Behalf Of	Volusia Cty Circuit Crt Clerk

Docket Date	2019-05-06
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice of Agreed Extension of Time - Initial Brief
Description	Notice of Agreed Extension - Initial Brief ~ TO 5/24
On Behalf Of	GLENN Q. ROSE

Docket Date	2019-04-30
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice of Agreed Extension of Time - Initial Brief
Description	Notice of Agreed Extension - Initial Brief ~ STRICKEN PER 4/30 ORDER
On Behalf Of	GLENN Q. ROSE

Docket Date	2019-04-30
Type	Order
Subtype	Order Striking Filing
Description	ORD-Strike for Non-Service on Client ~ AA FILE AMEND NOT W/IN 5 DAYS

Docket Date	2019-04-22
Type	Order
Subtype	Order Discharging Show Cause Order
Description	ORD-Discharging Show Cause ~ AAS FILE MOT FOR EOT FOR IB W/IN 7 DAYS

Docket Date	2019-04-18
Type	Response
Subtype	Response
Description	RESPONSE ~ AND REQUEST FOR EOT PER 4/18 ORDER
On Behalf Of	GLENN Q. ROSE

Docket Date	2019-04-18
Type	Order
Subtype	Show Cause
Description	Show Cause Lack of Prosecution, Initial Brief ~ AAS W/IN 10 DAYS

Docket Date	2019-02-06
Type	Order
Subtype	Order Declining Referral to Mediation
Description	ORD- Declining Referral to Mediation ~ IB W/IN 70 DAYS

Docket Date	2019-02-05
Type	Order
Subtype	Order Discharging Show Cause Order
Description	ORD-Discharging Show Cause

Docket Date	2019-02-05
Type	Response
Subtype	Response
Description	RESPONSE ~ PER 2/4 ORDER
On Behalf Of	GLENN Q. ROSE

Docket Date	2019-02-04
Type	Order
Subtype	Order to Show Cause
Description	Order to Show Cause - Filing Fee ~ AA W/IN 10 DAYS; DISCHARGED PER 2/5 ORDER

Docket Date	2019-01-25
Type	Mediation
Subtype	Confidential Statement
Description	Confidential Statement ~ AA RAFAEL F. GARCIA 0075058
On Behalf Of	GLENN Q. ROSE

Docket Date	2019-01-24
Type	Mediation
Subtype	Confidential Statement
Description	Confidential Statement ~ AE WILLIAM L. GRIMSLEY 0084226
On Behalf Of	Quicken Loans, Inc.

Docket Date	2019-01-14
Type	Letter
Subtype	Acknowledgment Letter
Description	Acknowledgement Letter 1

Docket Date	2019-01-14
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Filing Fee
Description	Order to pay filing fee - Civil appeal (300)

Docket Date	2019-01-14
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice of Appeal
Description	Notice of Appeal Filed ~ FILED BELOW 01/10/2019.
On Behalf Of	GLENN Q. ROSE

Docket Date	2019-01-14
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Fee Status
Description	A3:Paid In Full - $300

CAROLYN M. SMITH VS FANNIE MAE (FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION), ET AL.

2D2018-4893

2018-12-11

Closed

Classification	Original Proceedings - Circuit Civil - Certiorari
Court	2nd District Court of Appeal
Originating Court	Circuit Court for the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Pinellas County 2012-CA-13347

Parties

Name	CAROLYN M. SMITH
Role	Petitioner
Status	Active
Representations	AMY CUYKENDALL JONES, ESQ., BENJAMIN HILLARD, ESQ., ALEXANDER R. ALLRED, ESQ.

Name	FANNIE MAE (FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION)
Role	Respondent
Status	Active
Representations	ADAM J. KNIGHT, ESQ., CHOICE LEGAL GROUP, P. A., JACQUELINE SIMMS - PETREDIS, ESQ.

Name	SETERUS, INC.
Role	Respondent
Status	Active

Name	HON. PATRICIA A. MUSCARELLA
Role	Judge/Judicial Officer
Status	Active

Name	PINELLAS CLERK
Role	Lower Tribunal Clerk
Status	Active

Docket Entries

Docket Date	2019-02-22
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Case Closed
Description	Case Closed

Docket Date	2019-02-04
Type	Disposition
Subtype	Denied
Description	Denied - Order by Judge ~ Kelly, Badalamenti, and Atkinson

Docket Date	2019-02-04
Type	Disposition by Order
Subtype	Denied
Description	certiorari denied ~ The court's order to show cause dated January 11, 2019, is discharged, and the petition for writ of certiorari is denied.

Docket Date	2019-01-11
Type	Order
Subtype	Order
Description	MISCELLANEOUS ORDER ~ Within ten days from the date of this order, petitioner shall show cause why her petition should not be dismissed as untimely filed to review the discovery provisions of the order of referral to mediation.

Docket Date	2019-01-11
Type	Response
Subtype	Response
Description	RESPONSE ~ TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
On Behalf Of	CAROLYN M. SMITH

Docket Date	2018-12-26
Type	Petition
Subtype	Petition Certiorari
Description	Petition for Certiorari Filed
On Behalf Of	CAROLYN M. SMITH

Docket Date	2018-12-18
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice of Appearance
Description	Notice of Appearance
On Behalf Of	FANNIE MAE (FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION)

Docket Date	2018-12-11
Type	Letter
Subtype	Acknowledgment Letter
Description	Acknowledgment Letter 1

Docket Date	2018-12-11
Type	Petition
Subtype	Petition Certiorari
Description	Petition for Certiorari Filed
On Behalf Of	CAROLYN M. SMITH

Docket Date	2018-12-11
Type	Order
Subtype	Order Reclassifying Case
Description	cert conversion from appeal ~ This will proceed in certiorari. Petitioner shall submit a petition with appendices within fifteen days or this proceeding will be at risk of dismissal without further notice. The petition submitted shall carry the appellate case number on this order.

Docket Date	2018-12-11
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Fee Status
Description	A3:Paid In Full - $300

BETTY HENNINGTON, ET AL., VS SETERUS, INC.,

SC2017-1785

2017-09-29

Closed

Classification	Discretionary Review - Notice to Invoke - Direct Conflict of Decisions
Court	Supreme Court of Florida
Originating Court	Circuit Court for the First Judicial Circuit, Escambia County 172014CA002336XXXXXX Circuit Court for the First Judicial Circuit, Escambia County 1D16-2326

Parties

Name	Betty Hennington
Role	Petitioner
Status	Active
Representations	Jeremiah J. Talbott

Name	Joseph Hennington
Role	Petitioner
Status	Active

Name	SETERUS, INC.
Role	Respondent
Status	Active
Representations	Christopher Patrick Hahn, Hector E. Lora

Name	Hon. Gary Lee Bergosh
Role	Judge/Judicial Officer
Status	Active

Name	Jon S. Wheeler
Role	Lower Tribunal Clerk
Status	Active

Name	Hon. Pam Childers
Role	Lower Tribunal Clerk
Status	Active

Docket Entries

Docket Date	2017-10-05
Type	Disposition
Subtype	Rev/Appeal Dism No Juris Omnibus
Description	DISP-REV/APPEAL DISM NO JURIS OMNIBUS ~ This case is hereby dismissed. This Court lacks jurisdiction to review an unelaborated decision from a district court of appeal that is issued without opinion or explanation or that merely cites to an authority that is not a case pending review in, or reversed or quashed by, this Court. See Wells v. State, 132 So. 3d 1110 (Fla. 2014); Jackson v. State, 926 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 2006); Gandy v. State, 846 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 2003); Stallworth v. Moore, 827 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 2002); Harrison v. Hyster Co., 515 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 1987); Dodi Publ'g Co. v. Editorial Am. S.A., 385 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 1980); Jenkins v. State, 385 So. 2d 1356 (Fla. 1980). No motion for rehearing or reinstatement will be entertained by the Court.

Docket Date	2017-09-29
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Fee Status
Description	DM:Case Dismissed

Docket Date	2017-09-29
Type	Notice
Subtype	Invoke Discretionary Jurisdiction
Description	NOTICE-DISCRETIONARY JURIS (DIRECT CONFLICT) ~ Filed as a "Notice of Appeal" & treated as a Notice - Discretionary Jurisdiction
On Behalf Of	Betty Hennington
View	View File

MARIE JEAN-BART VS FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC.. ET AL.

4D2016-3422

2016-10-10

Closed

Classification	NOA Final - Circuit Civil - Foreclosure
Court	4th District Court of Appeal
Originating Court	Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County CACE150014394

Parties

Name	MARIE JEAN-BART
Role	Appellant
Status	Active
Representations	Nicole Moskowitz

Name	FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC.
Role	Appellee
Status	Active
Representations	William David Newman, Jr., Lindsay R. Dunn

Name	CHOICE LEGAL GROUP
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	JP MORGAN CHASE
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	DEPT. OF HOUSING & URBAN DEV.
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	Lindsay R. Dunn
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	SETERUS, INC.
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	Federal Trade Commission
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	FIRST AMERICAN LAW GROUP
Role	Appellee
Status	Active

Name	Hon. Joel T. Lazarus
Role	Judge/Judicial Officer
Status	Active

Name	Clerk - Broward
Role	Lower Tribunal Clerk
Status	Active

Docket Entries

Docket Date	2017-12-08
Type	Mandate
Subtype	Mandate
Description	Mandate

Docket Date	2017-12-08
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	West Publishing
Description	West Publishing

Docket Date	2017-11-22
Type	Disposition by Opinion
Subtype	Affirmed
Description	Affirmed - Per Curiam Affirmed

Docket Date	2017-11-22
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion For Attorney's Fees
Description	Deny Attorney's Fees ~ ORDERED that the appellant's April 17, 2017 motion for award of attorney's fees and to tax costs on appeal is denied.

Docket Date	2017-07-19
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Reply Brief
Description	Order Granting EOT for Appellant's Reply Brief ~ Upon consideration of appellee's July 13, 2017 response, it is ORDERED that appellant's July 12, 2017 motion for extension of time is granted in part, and appellant shall serve the reply brief on or before July 28, 2017. In addition, if the reply brief is served after the time provided for in this order, it may be stricken.

Docket Date	2017-07-13
Type	Response
Subtype	Response
Description	Response ~ TO APPELLANTS (SECOND) MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
On Behalf Of	FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC.

Docket Date	2017-07-12
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Reply Brief
Description	Mot. for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2017-06-16
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Reply Brief
Description	Order Granting EOT for Appellant's Reply Brief ~ ORDERED that appellant's June 12, 2017 motion for extension of time is granted, and appellant shall serve the reply brief on or before July 12, 2017. In addition, if the reply brief is served after the time provided for in this order, it may be stricken.

Docket Date	2017-06-12
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Reply Brief
Description	Mot. for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2017-05-22
Type	Brief
Subtype	Answer Brief
Description	Appellee's Answer Brief ~ (FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION)
On Behalf Of	FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC.

Docket Date	2017-05-18
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Answer Brief
Description	Order Granting EOT for Answer Brief ~ ORDERED that appellee's May 16, 2017 second motion for extension of time is granted, and appellee shall serve the answer brief on or before May 22, 2017. In addition, appellee is notified that the failure to serve the brief within the time provided herein may foreclose appellee's right to file a brief or otherwise participate in this appeal.

Docket Date	2017-05-16
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Answer Brief
Description	Mot. for Extension of time to file Answer Brief
On Behalf Of	FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC.

Docket Date	2017-05-11
Type	Record
Subtype	Supplemental Record
Description	Supplemental Records ~ 24 PAGES

Docket Date	2017-05-05
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Answer Brief
Description	Order Granting EOT for Answer Brief ~ ORDERED that appellee's May 3, 2017 motion for extension of time is granted, and appellee shall serve the answer brief within five (5) days from the date the record is supplemented. In addition, appellee is notified that the failure to serve the brief within the time provided herein may foreclose appellee's right to file a brief or otherwise participate in this appeal.

Docket Date	2017-05-03
Type	Motions Relating to Records
Subtype	Motion to Supplement Record
Description	Motion To File Supplemental Record
On Behalf Of	FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC.

Docket Date	2017-05-03
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Answer Brief
Description	Mot. for Extension of time to file Answer Brief
On Behalf Of	FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC.

Docket Date	2017-04-26
Type	Response
Subtype	Response
Description	Response ~ TO APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEY'S FEES AND TO TAX COSTS ON APPEAL
On Behalf Of	FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC.

Docket Date	2017-04-17
Type	Motions Relating to Attorney Fees/Costs
Subtype	Motion For Attorney's Fees
Description	Motion For Attorney's Fees ~ AND TO TAX COSTS ON APPEAL (RESPONSE FILED 4/26/17)
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2017-04-17
Type	Brief
Subtype	Initial Brief
Description	Initial Brief on Merits
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2017-03-28
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Initial Brief
Description	Order Granting EOT for Initial Brief ~ ORDERED that upon consideration of appellant's response filed March 23, 2017, this court's March 16, 2017 order to show cause is discharged; further, ORDERED that appellant's incorporated agreed motion for extension of time is granted, and appellant shall serve the initial brief within twenty (20) days from the date of this order. In addition, if the initial brief is not served within the time provided for in this order, the above-styled case may be subject to dismissal or the court in its discretion may impose other sanctions.

Docket Date	2017-03-23
Type	Response
Subtype	Response
Description	Response to Order to Show Cause ~ AND INCORPORATED AGREED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2017-03-16
Type	Order
Subtype	Show Cause
Description	Show Cause Lack of Prosecution, Initial Brief ~ OTSC DISCHARGED 3/28/17ORDERED that appellant in the above-styled case is directed to show cause in writing, if any there be, within ten (10) days from the date of the entry of this order, why the above-styled case should not be dismissed for lack of timely prosecution, in that the appellant's initial brief has not been filed with this court as of this date. Failure to respond to this order will result in a sua sponte dismissal without further notice. If the initial brief is filed within this time, the order to show cause will be considered automatically discharged without further order.

Docket Date	2017-02-08
Type	Order
Subtype	Order
Description	Miscellaneous Order ~ Upon consideration of appellant's January 13, 2017 jurisdictional brief, it is ORDERED that the above-styled appeal shall proceed as a final appeal pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110.

Docket Date	2017-02-03
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice of Appearance
Description	Notice of Appearance
On Behalf Of	FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC.

Docket Date	2017-01-18
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice of Appearance
Description	Notice of Appearance ~ AS CO-COUNSEL AND DESIGNATION OF EMAIL ADDRESS
On Behalf Of	FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOC.

Docket Date	2017-01-13
Type	Brief
Subtype	Jurisdictional Brief
Description	Jurisdictional Brief
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2017-01-12
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time
Description	Grant Extension of Time ~ ORDERED that appellant's January 11, 2017 motion for extension of time is granted, and the time to comply with this Court's December 21, 2016 order is extended to and including January 13, 2017.

Docket Date	2017-01-11
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice of Appearance
Description	Notice of Appearance
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2017-01-11
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time
Description	Motion for Extension of Time ~ TO COMPLY WITH DECEMBER 21, 2016 ORDER
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2016-12-21
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time
Description	Grant Extension of Time ~ ORDERED that appellant's December 13, 2016 motion for extension of time for briefing is granted, and the time for appellant to file in this court a brief statement explaining the basis for this court's subject matter jurisdiction over the order appealed in this case, citing supporting legal authorities in compliance with this court's October 13, 2016 order is extended fifteen (15) days from the date of the entry of this order. This is the final motion for extension of time that will be entertained for this purpose.

Docket Date	2016-12-13
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time
Description	Motion for Extension of Time ~ TO FILE JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2016-12-01
Type	Order
Subtype	Show Cause re Compliance with Prior Order
Description	Order to Show Cause-Appeal Dismissal ~ ORDERED that appellant is directed to show cause in writing, if any there be, within ten (10) days from the date of this order, why the above-styled case should not be dismissed or other sanctions imposed for failure to comply with this court's October 13, 2016 and November 2, 2016 orders requiring a brief statement explaining the basis for this court's subject matter jurisdiction over the order appealed to be filed. If the brief jurisdictional statement is filed within this ten (10) day period, this order to show cause will be considered automatically discharged without further order.

Docket Date	2016-11-16
Type	Record
Subtype	Record on Appeal
Description	Received Records ~ 297 PAGES

Docket Date	2016-11-02
Type	Order
Subtype	Order on Motion for Extension of Time
Description	Grant Extension of Time ~ ORDERED that appellant's October 24, 2016 motion for extension of time for briefing is granted, and the time for appellant to file in this court a brief statement explaining the basis for this court's subject matter jurisdiction over the order appealed in this case, citing supporting legal authorities in compliance with this court's October 13, 2016 order is extended fifteen (15) days from the date of the entry of this order.

Docket Date	2016-11-01
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Determination of Indigency/LT Order Insolvency
Description	Determination of Indigent Status

Docket Date	2016-10-27
Type	Order
Subtype	Order Striking Filing
Description	ORD-Stricken ~ ORDERED that the appellant's affidavit of indigent status is stricken without prejudice to filing the enclosed form with the clerk of the lower tribunal.

Docket Date	2016-10-24
Type	Motions Extensions
Subtype	Motion for Extension of Time
Description	Motion for Extension of Time ~ TO FILE JURISDICTIONAL BRIEF
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2016-10-24
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Affidavit
Description	Affidavit ~ OF INDIGENT STATUS STRICKEN 10/27/16
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2016-10-13
Type	Letter
Subtype	Acknowledgment Letter
Description	Acknowledgment Letter

Docket Date	2016-10-13
Type	Order
Subtype	Order to File Response re Jurisdiction
Description	AA - File Statement for Basis of Jurisdiction ~ ORDERED that within ten (10) days from the date of this order appellant shall file in this court a brief statement explaining the basis for this court's subject matter jurisdiction over the order appealed in this case, citing supporting legal authorities. Appellant shall specifically address how the partial summary final judgment is appealable, as it only grants judgment as to count II. See Taddie Underground Utility Co., Inc. v. Sloan Pump Co., Inc., 497 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) (as the disposed of actions in the partial summary judgment and the remaining causes of action are interrelated, the court held that there was no appealable final judgment); furtherAppellee may file a response within ten (10) days of service of that statement.

Docket Date	2016-10-10
Type	Notice
Subtype	Notice of Appeal
Description	Notice of Appeal Filed
On Behalf Of	MARIE JEAN-BART

Docket Date	2016-10-10
Type	Misc. Events
Subtype	Fee Status
Description	WV:Waived

Documents

Name	Date
Withdrawal	2019-03-01
ANNUAL REPORT	2018-04-10
ANNUAL REPORT	2017-04-14
ANNUAL REPORT	2016-03-11
ANNUAL REPORT	2015-03-23
ANNUAL REPORT	2014-04-16
Name Change	2014-02-24
ANNUAL REPORT	2013-01-23
ANNUAL REPORT	2012-04-02
Amendment	2011-09-28
Foreign Profit	2011-03-28

CFPB Complaint

Complaint Id

Date Received

Issue

Product

78651

2012-05-15

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage

Issue	Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	FHA mortgage
Date Received	2012-05-15
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with non-monetary relief
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2012-05-16
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

1775025

2016-02-05

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage

Issue	Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Other mortgage
Date Received	2016-02-05
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2016-02-05
Complaint What Happened	On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I sent Seterus, the servicer of my loan, a request to complete a new Escrow Analysis and spread the shortage over 60 months. I sent a follow up XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, and XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. I have had no response. Seterus approved a loan modification XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, but did not perform an escrow analysis prior to the modification, which ended up increasing my payment by {$190.00} per month. It should have been performed prior to the modification. And, a forbearance was approved from XXXX. The Seterus representative advised me in XXXX XXXX that the only thing I would be paying during the forbearance period would be taxes and insurance, then then ended up applying all monies to loan principal and interest. This is the reason for the large shortage. This servicer is extremely difficulty to work with. I previously filed complaints with you for XXXX reasons : they declined a loan modification 7 times in 4 years, citing that I did not provide all requested documents, which I had fax proof that I had provided, and a second time, in order to have the loan modification paperwork completed, as they took over 7 months to confirm and provide documents. Both times, they stepped up, only with your intervention. I am quite frustrated. I believe that I own XXXX of the few properties they could actually make money on if they foreclosed, and either the left hand does n't know what the right hand is doing, or it is with intent, so that they CAN foreclose and make $ XXXX-XXXX. They have continually misapplied, suspended payments, and then cited the original note, the forbearance or the modification, wherever it please them and they make the most money. They have also charged late fees and 'inspection fees to be sure I am living in the property ' since XXXX XXXX, XXXX due to misapplication of payments I made, even though the payments were the exact payment they requested for each specific date.I was not even aware of the misapplication of payments or the fees until XXXX XXXX, and they refused me access to the website and stopped sending statements to me due to Chapter XXXX filing in XXXX XXXX. Misapplication of funds also effects principal reduction clauses over the first 5 years of the modification term, and hurts my already damaged credit further. I truly believe this is all with intent, and need an advocate to renegotiate all of this with them, especially reapplication of payments made. Please help me negotiate these issues. Thank you, XXXX XXXX
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

1325525

2015-04-10

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage

Issue	Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional fixed mortgage
Date Received	2015-04-10
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2015-04-10
Complaint What Happened	I was told by the primary party in this matter to submit papers for a Deed in Lieu and obtain a payoff from a XXXX source. Everything was done as asked, all papers submitted along with the payoff information, before the end of XXXX 2014. I initiated contact because I had not heard from the primary company. I have talked to at least XXXX different people each time I 've called who all gave me different information ( additional papers that had not been received and needed to be faxed in ). I was finally told the XXXX week of XXXX, after communicating with the other representatives, that I would need to re-submit all papers again because the ones I submitted had expired. How do they expire when they have them setting who knows because no one seem to know what 's going on. I was even told by XXXX of the representatives that all of the documents had been received, and I asked what I needed to do next or what would happen next. He could only give me the name of the person in charge of the department and told me to call back XXXX to see what might be going on. I resubmitted the packet again ( XXXX pages of XXXX ) numbered.After submitting the papers by fax as asked, and calling XXXX days later at their request to confirm that the packet had been received, I was once again told that they did n't receive XXXX of the papers. I numbered each page and the page that they claimed they did not receive was page XXXX of XXXX. I was also told to call the second party again and get a payoff amount and have them fax that to them. After talking to the representative of the XXXX party, she confirmed that she faxed the information to the XXXX party back on XXXX XXXX, 2014 as I had asked her to do via the XXXX party 's request. I seem to keep getting the run around and can never talked to XXXX person who maybe able to keep up with what 's really happening with my account. The representatives of the XXXX party are rude and it seems impossible for me to get this matter taken care of and closed. XXXX. I 'm to my wits end and need some intervention, please.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

1986813

2016-06-27

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage

Issue	Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional fixed mortgage
Date Received	2016-06-27
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	Yes
Date Sent To Company	2016-06-27
Complaint What Happened	I 'm just not sure Seterus really understands my position in their claiming to be the new servicer of my loan. 1 ) I have not received notification or any communication from the owner of the loan which to me provided the proper 'authorization ' to then begin working with me ... 2 ) Because of # 1, Seterus continues to do nothing but harass me because of 3 ) I have notified Seterus that the information they have is incorrect and if they look closely, they can get a sense of what I am stating is true. a ) I have stated XXXX had my insurance information and it 's all documented with the CFPB, would one really lie about 'documentation ' when obviously that whole point in stating that is because it can be pulled up ...??? b ) I have mentioned the balance otherwise being incorrect partly because XXXX was not applying payments properly. Obviously Seterus has my payment history and clearly they can see payments were being made twice a month but only posted later in the month and common sense tells you I was paying like that for a reason and that reason which is very common in mortgages is to pay the loan down more quickly, not to give the bank money ahead of time for them to use as they wish ... c ) the balance also was not correct due to some fees that were charged and Seterus can see those fees in those records as well. It 's not up to me to have Seterus be judge and jury ( they asked for all this documentation ), it is for XXXX and XXXX to work this out but XXXX XXXX XXXX has refused to look at the history of my correspondence even though I 've told them numerous times exactly when the insurance information was provided ... I 've tried to contact Fannie Mae and no response from them. Based on this, Seterus needs to tell someone that these issues need to be worked out before resuming with this account. At this point it 's a bad account and for no other reason than that Seterus does not have the correct information, Seterus seemingly refuses to accept the information is wrong but at least in my opinion Seterus is digging a pretty deep hole by continuing to harass me and threatening foreclosure ...
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

187430

2012-11-02

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage

Issue	Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional fixed mortgage
Date Received	2012-11-02
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2012-11-28
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

1956209

2016-06-06

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage

Issue	Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Other mortgage
Date Received	2016-06-06
Submitted Via	Referral
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2016-06-08
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

2212905

2016-11-17

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage

Issue	Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional fixed mortgage
Date Received	2016-11-17
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2016-11-17
Complaint What Happened	I am working with my servicer to get a loan modification. I fill out the forms that they require and send them to the address listed on the form. I send the documents priority mail with tracking from the post office to ensure receipt. I follow up with a phone call and get told that they do n't have them. Then I receive the documents returned as undeliverable with a forwarding stamp which is expired. The documents clearly state send to " Seterus Inc. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, MI XXXX '' I have included a screen shot dated and time stamped Wed XXXX XXXX, XXXX. The Seterus Rep said, " Oh we have n't used that address for months. '' as if I was a nincompoop for using this. And when I pointed out that this was the information that was currently on their website she seemed completely unconcerned with the misinformation and the potential consequences. and, of course, " Well your loan documents are now expired you have to start over. ''
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

1529725

2015-08-21

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage

Issue	Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Date Received	2015-08-21
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2015-08-21
Complaint What Happened	XXXX/XXXX/2015 I faxed loan modification package to loan servicer, Seterus , Inc . XXXX/XXXX/2015 Spoke with Seterus agent XXXX, she advised they need the long form XXXX for XXXX borrowers. XXXX/XXXX/2015 I faxed lender XXXX form for XXXX borrowers. XXXX/XXXX/15 Spoke with Seterus agent, XXXX XXXX in the Bankruptcy dept, she advised all documents were received and that the file is with the under writer as of today. XXXX/XXXX/2015 Spoke with Sterus agent XXXX XXXX in Bankruptcy dept, she advsied the file is still under review by their, Loss Mit Officer, then it goes to the Investor for approval. XXXX/XXXX/2015 Spoke with Seterus agent XXXX XXXX, in Bankruptcy dept.,, she advised the file is still w/ the underwriter under review. She said she would email the underwriter to ask for update. XXXX/XXXX/2015 Client provided our office with a XXXX 2015 letter from Steterus saying he was offered a loan modification in XXXX of 2015. This came as a surprise to both the borrower and this office, as the aforementioned letter was never received. I called Seterus and spoke with XXXX in the Bankruptcy Dept., she said confirmed there was in deed a modification offer sent to the borrower to an address of : XXXX Florida, which is not the address of this office nor an address connected to the borrower. Furthermore, the offer letter was never sent to the property address. XXXX/XXXX/2015 Spoke with Seterus agent, XXXX XXXX in Bankruptcy Dept whom stated the file is still with the underwriter. He also found a copy of the first trial mod approval from XXXX 2015 with delivery address of, XXXX, of which I requested a copy be faxed to us. He said it would take 7-10 business days. XXXX/XXXX/2015 I spoke with Seterus Agent, XXXX XXXX in delinquency Dept, she stated the file is still with the under writer as they had been waiting for figures from their atty. She advised a decision could be expected within the next two weeks. XXXX/XXXX/2015 Seterus agent XXXX in Strategic Foreclosure dept stated the loan modification is still in review and that she would place a request to have the file reviewed. She said the review has taken so long because they had to wait for the previous streamline modification they previously offered, to expire. XXXX/XXXX/2015 XXXX XXXX in the delinquency dept, stated the file is still with the underwriter. She escalated the file again and advised her supervisor. XXXX/XXXX/2015 I called Seterus and spoke with agent XXXX in Bankruptcy dept., he stated my previous request to get a copy of the XXXX trial offer letter was not completed because the agent did not enter the request correctly. XXXX ordered a copy of the XXXX trial offer letter be sent to our office. He advised the original offer letter sent was out on XXXX/XXXX/15 for a trial period of XXXX, XXXX & XXXX ; sent to : XXXX. XXXX said we should receive the letter by XXXX/XXXX/15. XXXX/XXXX/2015 Spoke with Seterus agent XXXX XXXX, she advised that she sees where they requested a copy of the XXXX Trial offer letter but that it has not been sent out. She put in another request and asked that the letter be faxed instead of being mailed. XXXX/XXXX/2015 XXXX XXXX in Bankruptcy dept. advised file is still under review. XXXX/XXXX/2015 Spoke with Seterus agent, XXXX XXXX, she advised she escalated the file once again and emailed the underwriter to advise that the file has been escalated 3 times already. XXXX/XXXX/15 Spoke with Seterus XXXX XXXX who stated the file was still with the underwriter and that she would escalate the file again.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

2196774

2016-11-04

Disclosure verification of debt

Debt collection

Issue	Disclosure verification of debt
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Debt collection
Sub Issue	Not given enough info to verify debt
Sub Product	Mortgage
Date Received	2016-11-04
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2016-11-04
Complaint What Happened	Seterus continues to harass me and while I have asked for legal verification of their role as a servicing company to my mortgage and also legal documentation of Fannie Mae 's ownership of the loan, they have provided neither. I 've received hundreds of pages of documents and the only related thing was from XXXX which XXXX does not own the loan and also was n't able to provide the same documentation I 'm asking for now.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

2122630

2016-09-21

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage

Issue	Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	FHA mortgage
Date Received	2016-09-21
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2016-09-21
Complaint What Happened	I am in a continual modification with Seterus. On XXXX I had spoke to XXXX at XXXX and he stated that he could n't tell me anything about my modification because I was being represented by legal counsel. I told him that I sent you information on this last XXXX that I was not represented by legal counsel. He told me that he has no documents and told me to send it again. I asked him to tell me exactly how does he wanted spelled out. " No longer being represented by legal authority counsel. Remove counsel on file. '' It was faxed to them on XXXX. On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX I spoke with XXXX XXXX and he told me that the fax was showing in their system. On XXXX I spoke with XXXX XXXX and she confirmed my modification has been set for trial payments of 3-4 starting XXXX XXXX. I paid her XXXX & XXXX in the amount of {$840.00} for each month. I called and paid XXXX with no problem. When I called for the XXXX payment, XXXX XXXX, they took my monthly payment and told me congratulations the modification has gone through for {$840.00} a month. Then she put me on hold, came back and told me that she ca n't proceed anymore because I 'm being represented by an attorney. She also told me that their attorney, XXXX needed to be contacted by me before XXXX XXXX with signed documentation. I also need to send Seterus a letter stating that I am not represented by legal counsel and that she did not have any documentation of my fax from XXXX. The last time I paid my 4th payment in the modification process, they told me I was in default and had to start the process all over again. That was in XXXX. I paid close to {$4000.00} then. They are unorganized and each time I talk to someone at Seterus they tell me something different from the last person. Frustrated. I feel like I 'm being taking advantage of their mistakes.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

1298008

2015-03-24

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage

Issue	Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional fixed mortgage
Date Received	2015-03-24
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2015-03-24
Complaint What Happened	My Mortgage company will not process a loan payoff request. It has been 10 phone calls and 3 weeks to try to get this info. I am convinced they are milking days of interest for this. I was supposed to close on a re-fi on XX/XX/XXXX and I am now calling them again with no resolve
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

1875362

2016-04-12

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage

Tags	Older American
Issue	Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)
Date Received	2016-04-12
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2016-04-12
Complaint What Happened	I have a mortgage with Seterus. They took it over from XXXX and it is a XXXX mortgage. I am being told that my first payment with XXXX was used to implement the mortgage. Therefore I am behind XXXX payment. When I asked for the statement showing where the money went, they cant or wont produce it. I have all the statements from XXXX and the statements show a normal monthly payment. Seterus tells me to stop asking for this information. I have statements from Seterus that are absolutely inaccurate and ridiculous. I have told them show me where the statement, closing statement, loan origination statement and they refuse to do that. This is now five years old and they are about to foreclose on our home. I have written them and explained to them, just show me the statement and I will immediately send the missing payment and all the late fees that have originated in the last five years. I have never been foreclosed on and have not missed any payments. There most likely will be a court hearing and at that hearing I will present my letters asking for this XXXX item from Seterus. I even sent them a bank statement showing all my payments. Not XXXX is missing.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

89270

2012-05-30

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage

Issue	Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional fixed mortgage
Date Received	2012-05-30
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2012-05-31
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

461072

2013-07-31

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage

Issue	Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Other mortgage
Date Received	2013-07-31
Submitted Via	Referral
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2013-08-02
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

2380346

2017-03-09

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage

Tags	Older American
Issue	Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional fixed mortgage
Date Received	2017-03-09
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	Yes
Date Sent To Company	2017-03-13
Complaint What Happened	On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX, through counsel, submitted a complaint ( # XXXX ) to the CFPB asserting that Seterus, Inc., violated the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ( RESPA ) in failing to communicate with him as a " successor-in-interest '' to property subject to a mortgage loan serviced by XXXX and therefore also failed to mitigate its damages. XXXX ' late wife, XXXX, was the only person the note, but both XXXX and XXXX signed the mortgage defined as borrowers. The complaint asserted that XXXX and XXXX owned the property as " tenants by the entireties, '' and both prior to the complaint and within the complaint, XXXX provided Seterus a copy of the Warranty Deed to the property showing such ownership and a copy of XXXX ' Death Certificate. This evidence clearly showed that not only was XXXX a successor-in-interest to the property ( because he became the sole owner by operation of law ), but that he 's ALWAYS had an interest in the property at the same time XXXX had her interest in the property. This documentation unequivocally shows XXXX ' successor-in-interest status, and as such, Seterus should have been satisfied XXXX was indeed a successor-in-interest and it should have communicated with XXXX about the mortgage loan and offered loss mitigation options to him -- but Seterus did not do that. Instead, Seterus responded ( through its representative, XXXX -- not clear whether she 's an attorney ) that it still wants " recorded documentation showing XXXX is the Executor, Personal Representative, or Administrator of the Estate of XXXX. '' With this response, Seterus is requiring XXXX to exert his own resources and judicial resources to put property through probate that is not required to go through probate for XXXX to obtain a legal interest in such property. Probating the property is not required because he always had an interest in the property, as evidenced by the RECORDED Warranty Deed, and because he became the sole owner of the property by operation of law when XXXX died. Seterus ' response further said, " in lieu of the above-referenced documentation, XXXX may also contact me directly at the telephone number shown below and advise that he is authorized to pay the decedent 's debt from the assets of the estate, which will allow him authorization to speak to us regarding the loan. '' XXXX disagrees that calling XXXX to say the magic words she wants him to say in any way tends to prove he is a successor-in-interest to the property more than the recorded Warranty Deed and Death Certificate does, much less at all. Regardless, XXXX called XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. Both times he was forced to leave a message, and both times, XXXX failed to return his call. As such, Seterus continues to put up artificial barriers to XXXX being able to work out loss mitigation options to save his home from foreclosure. Also, XXXX submitted a loss mitigation application, which was received by Seterus on XX/XX/XXXX As of today, XX/XX/XXXX, Seterus has failed to notify XXXX within 5 days of receiving the loss mitigation application that it acknowledged receipt of the application and that it determined the loss mitigation application is either complete or incomplete, as is required in Regulation X at 12 CFR 1024.41 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( i ) ( B ). Moreover, Seterus has failed, within 30 days of receiving XXXX ' loss mitigation application, to evaluate him for all loss mitigation options available to him and to provide him with a notice in writing stating its determination of which loss mitigation options, if any, it will offer him, as is required by Regulation X at 12 CFR 1024.41 ( c ) ( 1 ). So, Seterus continues to violate RESPA.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

1674748

2015-11-29

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage

Issue	Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional fixed mortgage
Date Received	2015-11-29
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2015-11-29
Complaint What Happened	About 2 years ago I became XXXX. In XX/XX/XXXX I had to have a XXXX. My wife struggled to keep up with the mortgage and did so until XXXX 2014 when we started to fall behind. By XXXX we were about {$4000.00} behind and foreclosure was started on XXXX. I was awarded XXXX in XXXX and received back pay in XXXX. When we contacted Seterus we were told that it would cost us over {$11000.00} to stop foreclosure and make everything fine. After speaking to a few attorneys we agreed to pay them. They told us that the {$11000.00} would make us current including XXXX mortgage and would cover all legal fees. We then paid XXXX mortgage early. On XXXX we received another notice stating that we owe another {$3800.00} due XX/XX/XXXX. We probably will not be able to make that payment since Seterus took the majority of the back pay I received from XXXX. I believe these piranha will continue to extort money from us until they succeed in taking our home! PLEASE HELP!!!!!!!!
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

880185

2014-06-04

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage

Issue	Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Other mortgage
Date Received	2014-06-04
Submitted Via	Referral
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2014-06-06
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

3152424

2019-02-14

Incorrect information on your report

Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports

Issue	Incorrect information on your report
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub Issue	Old information reappears or never goes away
Sub Product	Credit reporting
Date Received	2019-02-14
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	N/A
Date Sent To Company	2019-02-14
Company Public Response	Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent not provided

98766

2012-06-07

Other

Mortgage

Issue	Other
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Other mortgage
Date Received	2012-06-07
Submitted Via	Postal mail
Company Response	Closed
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2012-06-14
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

3149156

2019-02-11

Incorrect information on your report

Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports

Tags	Servicemember
Issue	Incorrect information on your report
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub Issue	Account status incorrect
Sub Product	Credit reporting
Date Received	2019-02-11
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	N/A
Date Sent To Company	2019-02-14
Company Public Response	Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Complaint What Happened	I have a XXXX XXXX mortgage loan serviced by Seterus and the loan was offered a forbearance owing to the federally-declared disaster from Hurricane Irma. The forbearance let to a loan modification which had a trial plan that ended on XX/XX/XXXX. The trial period payments were made on time as required by the modification agreement i.e., XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, Seterus ceased from being the servicer on the loan and new servicer now is XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX has concluded the modification process begun by Seterus. On XX/XX/XXXX, Seterus maliciously made a derogatory report to the Credit Bureaus by stating that the loan was 120 days past due. This is incorrect. The loan was being repaid as agreed leading up to the declaration of the disaster by the federal government and one of the terms and conditions of the forbearance was that negative reports would not be made as long as the loan was in forbearance. Immediately after the forbearance the loan was approved for modification and the terms of the modification were adhered as prescribed. I am disputing the report of the loan being 120 days late. I spoke to 3 people at Seterus today, Mr XXXX, Mr XXXX XXXX and Supervisor XXXX XXXXn. Ms. XXXX stated that the late payment applies to XX/XX/XXXX. This is incorrect because the loan was in forbearance at that time and the terms of the forbearance specifically state that no negative reporting will be made, so Seterus is violating its agreement.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

3128284

2019-01-18

Struggling to pay mortgage

Mortgage

Issue	Struggling to pay mortgage
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional home mortgage
Date Received	2019-01-18
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	N/A
Date Sent To Company	2019-01-18
Company Public Response	Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Complaint What Happened	I have attempted repeatedly to resolve the issues with my mortgage. Despite sending in complete applications and complying with all the requirements of the Servicer ( Seterus Inc. ) and Investor ( XXXX XXXX ), I am denied without sound explanation, for any loss mitigation assistance. On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted a third application for Home Retention assistance. Five days later, the Servicer responded with what I can only describe as a vague and/or evasive denial. For example, the Servicer denies the application for the investor 's 'XXXX XXXX Non-Delegated Modification stating : " Denied ' The loan was not submitted to the investor for evaluation of this program because the eligibility requirements were not met. '' Again, the Servicer denies review for Short Sale claiming : " Denied. You may be eligible, but we do not have complete documents from you for this program type. We did not evaluate you for this program based on any other criteria. '' These denials only coincide with the Servicer 's insistence on scheduling judicial foreclosure sale dates despite having complete packages prior to the required 37 days set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR ) ( 12 CFR 1024.41 - Loss mitigation procedures ), particularly : ( c ) Evaluation of loss mitigation applications - ( 1 ) Complete loss mitigation application. Except as provided in paragraph ( c ) ( 4 ) ( ii ) of this section, if a servicer receives a complete loss mitigation application more than 37 days before a foreclosure sale, then, within 30 days of receiving the complete loss mitigation application, a servicer shall : ( i ) Evaluate the borrower for all loss mitigation options available to the borrower ; and ( ii ) Provide the borrower with a notice in writing stating the servicer 's determination of which loss mitigation options, if any, it will offer to the borrower on behalf of the owner or assignee of the mortgage. The servicer shall include in this notice the amount of time the borrower has to accept or reject an offer of a loss mitigation program as provided for in paragraph ( e ) of this section, if applicable, and a notification, if applicable, that the borrower has the right to appeal the denial of any loan modification option as well as the amount of time the borrower has to file such an appeal and any requirements for making an appeal, as provided for in paragraph ( h ) of this section.. The Servicer circumvents the CFR 's requirement to : 2 ( i ) ( B ) Notify the borrower in writing within 5 days ( excluding legal public holi days, Satur days, and Sun days ) after receiving the loss mitigation application that the servicer acknowledges receipt of the loss mitigation application and that the servicer has determined that the loss mitigation application is either complete or incomplete. If a loss mitigation application is incomplete, the notice shall state the additional documents and information the borrower must submit to make the loss mitigation application complete and the applicable date pursuant to paragraph ( b ) ( 2 ) ( ii ) of this section. The notice to the borrower shall include a statement that the borrower should consider contacting servicers of any other mortgage loans secured by the same property to discuss available loss mitigation options. Instead of acknowledging a complete application, the Servicer denies it within the 5 days. I opened up a complaint with the Servicer, and received notice that the matter was being investigated. This response was submitted to my Attorney on XX/XX/XXXX. I have yet to hear the results of that investigation, while the Servicer has scheduled 2 more Sale Dates since.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

3120857

2019-01-09

Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem

Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports

Issue	Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub Issue	Investigation took more than 30 days
Sub Product	Credit reporting
Date Received	2019-01-09
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	N/A
Date Sent To Company	2019-01-09
Company Public Response	Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent not provided

3078373

2018-11-19

Trouble during payment process

Mortgage

Issue	Trouble during payment process
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional home mortgage
Date Received	2018-11-19
Submitted Via	Referral
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	N/A
Date Sent To Company	2018-11-19
Company Public Response	Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

3106987

2018-12-21

Trouble during payment process

Mortgage

Tags	Servicemember
Issue	Trouble during payment process
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional home mortgage
Date Received	2018-12-21
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	N/A
Date Sent To Company	2018-12-21
Complaint What Happened	XXXX working on behalf of Seterus has is withholding the check in which they received from my insurance company to repair my roof and den area. The work has been completed by all contractors and all documents that XXXX has required have been uploaded and validated as received, but they refuse to release the actual check. Consequently, contractors are now in the process of suing me civilly for their funds. No one at XXXX seems to know what is going on. Each person states that they have placed the payment request but for some reason the check has not been cut.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

2865232

2018-04-05

Struggling to pay mortgage

Mortgage

Issue	Struggling to pay mortgage
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Other type of mortgage
Date Received	2018-04-05
Submitted Via	Referral
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	N/A
Date Sent To Company	2018-04-05
Company Public Response	Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

2818675

2018-02-19

Trouble during payment process

Mortgage

Issue	Trouble during payment process
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional home mortgage
Date Received	2018-02-19
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	N/A
Date Sent To Company	2018-02-19
Company Public Response	Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Complaint What Happened	XX/XX/XXXX - We received our annual notice on how to cancel PMI and the requirements to cancel PMI, which states we need a LTV ratio of 80 %. Document states " or according to your contract ''. XX/XX/XXXX - Called to verify the requirements to cancel according to OUR contract. We requested the forms needed to cancel PMI because we believed we qualified for the cancellation, or if we did not, we would qualify within 6 months ( one of the requirements within their notice ) XX/XX/XXXX - The mortgage company mailed our packet for PMI cancelation which again included the requirements to cancel PMI. ( note : no where on this form does it say " or according to your contract ''. ) XX/XX/XXXX - I again called the mortgage company to verify these were the requirements for MY mortgage as well as verify the calculations for loan to value ratio. ( I was told to take the remaining loan principle and add 20 %, my appraised value needed to be higher. Even when I asked explicitly, " are you sure I do not take the appraised value and subtract 20 %, and my principle needs to be lower? '' I was assured by the person taking my call, XXXX XXXX, and her supervisor, XXXX XXXX, that I was incorrect. XX/XX/XXXX - With the assurance of the letter and phone calls, we sent our check for {$350.00} to get our house appraised to have the PMI removed. XX/XX/XXXX - Mortgage company sent a letter of receiving our check. XX/XX/XXXX - Appraisal was completed. XX/XX/XXXX - Mortgage company sent letter denying our request. XX/XX/XXXX - Mortgage company added a note to our file that our contract states that we must be at 75 % XXXX under 5 years ( we were 7 months shy of our 5 years ). XXXX, XXXX - After receiving our denial of PMI cancelation, I called and talked with XXXX XXXX, who confirmed the actions on XX/XX/XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX I faxed a letter to the mortgage company with all of the above actions outlined on the letter. XX/XX/XXXX - the mortgage company sent a letter stating " we apologize for any misinformation you may have received from our Representatives '' and continued to tell us the " new '' information of 75 % LTV ratio. XX/XX/XXXX - Received my annual notice concerning PMI and the requirements to remove PMI. AGAIN, the letter states my LTV must be 80 % or less. XX/XX/XXXX - meet with a Lawyer about actions we should take. Suggested giving the mortgage company one more chance by submitting a complaint here.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

1959398

2016-06-08

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage

Issue	Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Other mortgage
Date Received	2016-06-08
Submitted Via	Referral
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2016-06-09
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

3061145

2018-10-30

Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem

Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports

Issue	Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub Issue	Problem with personal statement of dispute
Sub Product	Credit reporting
Date Received	2018-10-30
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	N/A
Date Sent To Company	2018-10-30
Company Public Response	Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Complaint What Happened	Entered into a disaster relief forbearance with lender under the XXXX XXXX disaster relief program as a result of Hurricane Irma. As part of the program, credit report was to be suppressed and no negative information was to be reported to the credit bureaus. During the forbearance period, I paid off the loan in full including including all the deferred payments when I sold the house. Upon payoff of the loan, I was reported to the credit bureaus as being 180+ days past due. I had this loan since XX/XX/2004 and was never late. The lender has refused to fix the issue and has advised that regardless of being under a disaster relief forbearance, they suppressed the reporting during the forbearance but when I paid off the loan, I was out of the forbearance period and had to report me negatively to the credit bureau.
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

919595

2014-07-01

Loan servicing, payments, escrow account

Mortgage

Issue	Loan servicing, payments, escrow account
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	FHA mortgage
Date Received	2014-07-01
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2014-07-01
Consumer Consent Provided	N/A

2442082

2017-04-19

Loan modification,collection,foreclosure

Mortgage

Issue	Loan modification,collection,foreclosure
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Product	Conventional fixed mortgage
Date Received	2017-04-19
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	No
Date Sent To Company	2017-04-19
Company Public Response	Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Complaint What Happened	your company failed to provide the required notice of additional required documents within five ( 5 ) business days in violation of Regulation X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( B ). Therefore, this client 's application is entitled to be treated as facially complete pursuant to Regulation X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( c ) ( iv ).
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent provided

2478883

2017-05-08

Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem

Mortgage

Issue	Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Timely	Yes
Company	Seterus, Inc.
Product	Mortgage
Sub Issue	Investigation took more than 30 days
Sub Product	Conventional home mortgage
Date Received	2017-05-08
Submitted Via	Web
Company Response	Closed with explanation
Consumer Disputed	N/A
Date Sent To Company	2017-05-08
Consumer Consent Provided	Consent withdrawn

Date of last update: 01 Apr 2025

Sources: Florida Department of State

SETERUS, INC. - Florida Company Profile

Company Details

Key Officers & Management

Events

Court Cases

Documents

CFPB Complaint

Companies related by officers

Companies related by address